‘Accuracy without Harm... Truth intrepidly told... A striking spotlight on the beautiful and terrible events of humankind.'

Friday, October 29, 2010

The anti-Christ to European anti-federalist movements, the foundational Lisbon treaty is set to be hammered into yet another form by the EU king makers France and Germany

Note by Marc Aupiais

French state global propaganda machine France 24 hosts an article by Reuters claiming that a French and German push to force other EU Eurozone nations to follow conservative economic policy after the PIGGS crises is set to push through the European parliament.

The Lisbon treaty, which creates a serious if not intrusive bond between the European nations party to the EU is very popular among ruling coalitions and parties across the EU, and very unpopular among the nations' citizens. The Catholic church opposed the original Lisbon treaty. The move to amend Lisbon, oft portrayed as a European constitution, has been seen by more liberal nations as an attempt to coerce conservative economic policies into existence across Europe.

The American Tea Party movement aims to promote similar economic policy in the federalist United States of America.
"Germany wants limited treaty alterations to ensure there is a permanent and legally sound crisis-resolution system in place for countries that use the euro. It has threatened to block the budget reforms if no deal is reached.

Many of the EU's 27 member states see the logic in Germany's proposal and could support it in principle, but need convincing that a change to the treaty is needed to set up the mechanism, and want any agreed amendments to be narrowly defined.

Any change to an EU treaty must be approved unanimously and ratified by all member states, either in a vote of parliament or via a referendum. The European Parliament should also agree.

In a sign that momentum towards treaty change was growing, countries such as Finland, Greece, Sweden and Britain, along with Poland, Slovakia and Ireland, signalled they would support limited amendments, although Warsaw linked its support to a deal on pension reforms.

"The euro area needs a credible permanent crisis mechanism to ensure the financial stability of the euro area as a whole," said Finnish Prime Minister Mari Kiviniemi, whose country had said earlier this week it opposed such moves.

"If this new system requires treaty change, then treaty change should be done."

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said treaty change could be discussed if it was needed to improve the EU's ability to respond to economic and financial crises.

France's European affairs minister, Pierre Lellouche, said in Berlin that countries were warming to the Franco-German position, which he called a gift to Europe.

Mandate for Council, Commission

EU sources said the leaders were expected to give a mandate to the Commission and to Herman Van Rompuy, the president of the EU Council which represents the member states' governments, to work out how the treaty could be amended.

"Van Rompuy will receive a mandate to talk to the 27 member states on the opportunity for a treaty reform. And the Commission will receive a mandate to explore the technical modalities of such a reform," a senior EU source said.

In an agreement struck in the northern French town of Deauville on Oct. 18, Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy said they wanted concrete treaty change proposals on the table before an EU summit next March.

Germany wants to have the changes in force before the 2013 expiry of the EU's temporary mechanism for handling the euro zone debt crisis, a 440-billion-euro ($600-billion) IMF-backed fund called the European Financial Stability Fund (EFSF).

The EFSF is taxpayer-funded and Germany fears it could violate a clause in the Lisbon treaty against bailouts. It has faced legal challenges in Germany's constitutional court.

Britain, which opposes any treaty amendments that could transfer more power to Brussels, has indicated it could back the proposal if it affects only the euro zone. Ireland said it hoped to avoid holding a referendum on treaty change."

I have always been fascinated with the law. By chance, it happens to be my field. I am an admitted attorney of the High Court of South Africa, as of 28 January 2016.

It was my fellow students'​ suggestions, in the final years of school, that I might be suited to a career in law, along with long discussions with a friend of mine - which imbued me with a keen interest in the history, language, and laws of the Roman Empire - that made me realise that law was the choice of career that best suited the ideas and plans I had for the future. I enrolled in an LLB degree at Wits University and subsequently graduated Bachelor of Laws a few years later.

I completed, with distinction, the Law Society's Legal Education and Development (L.E.A.D) School for Legal Practice program. I am pleased to have had the privilege of having served at two very different firms during my articles, giving me a much broader experience of work in the profession.

I believe success requires not just hard work, but intelligence, perseverance, humility, integrity, ingenuity, diligence, a strong work ethic, and the courage to request the assistance of those better-versed in a matter, or field.

I am passionate about the place of my birth, South Africa and am proud to be a patriot and citizen of this diverse and beautiful nation. I consider myself a global citizen and keep connections in a number of different nations across the world. Communicating with people from other cultures, I believe, has aided me to have a more open-minded approach in so far as how I see and interact with the world.

The cultures and legal systems, morals, and courtesy systems, languages, intricacies and religions of South Africa and of the world, are subjects I love to research. I extensively enjoy reading and writing, and in keeping abreast with important events occurring in other countries, I find my knowledge of other languages, especially French, to be quite useful.

No comments:

Post a Comment

No spam, junk, hate-speech, or anti-religion stuff, thank you. Also no libel, or defamation of character. Keep it clean, keep it honest. No trolling. Keep to the point. We look forward to your comments!